1. Field of Invention
This invention relates to rear wheel suspensions for bicycles. More particularly to an improvement on the rear suspension systems that have the crank axle mounted on the swingarm.
2. Discussion of Prior Art
Rear wheel suspension systems for bicycles have been designed for over a century. There are numerous methods of providing suspension for the rear wheel. In general, they work by having a main frame on the forward end and some form of a swingarm attached to it. The rear wheel is generally attached at the rearward end of the swingarm. The swingarm is allowed to move independently from the main frame so as to provide the suspension action. The rider turns a crank assembly comprising pedals, cranks and a crank axle. The power is transmitted to the rear wheel by a chain driven transmission. The suspension systems can roughly be divided into two categories: those that have the crank axle mounted on the main frame and those that have the crank axle mounted on the swingarm.
The first category has the crank axle mounted on the main frame. In these systems there are one or more pivoting connections in the path between the crank axle and the rear wheel. A simple version of this system with a single pivot is schematically shown in FIG. 2. There are significant disadvantages to these systems:
a) The distance between the rear axle and the crank axle is not constant throughout the suspension travel. Since power from the crank axle is transmitted to the wheel by a chain, this variation in distance causes disturbances in the power transmission.
b) There is the structural problem of having a pivot in the load path between the crank axle and the wheel. During pedaling, there is considerable chain tension, which is delivered in pulses. The swingarm pivot is subject to all of these pulses and it is very difficult to make the pivot durable, stiff and light.
c) The swingarm is also susceptible to unwanted actuation caused by the pedaling pulses in the drive train. This phenomenon is commonly referred to as “bobbing”. Ideally the swingarm pivot would be located such that the variation in chain tension would not cause bobbing. However it is not possible to locate the pivot such that there is not bobbing in any gear choice. The wide range of gear ratios offered by modern drive trains (currently 27 speeds) causes the chain tension and chain angle to vary widely depending on gear selection. Therefore the pivot location is a compromise that works better for some gear combinations and worse for others.
The present invention falls into the second category where the crank axle is mounted on the swingarm. This type of suspension is commonly referred to as a unified rear triangle design or URT. Some examples of these designs are schematically shown in FIGS. 3, 4, 5 and 6. The distance between the crank axle and the rear wheel remains constant because they are both mounted on the swing arm. This has the advantage in that the power transmission to the wheel is delivered without disturbance from suspension actuation. It also has the advantage in that the swingarm pivot is not subject to the chain tension pulses.
Current URTs have different pivot locations. FIGS. 3, 4, 5 and 6 show various pivot locations. Each pivot location has its advantages and disadvantages. The pivot location can be defined by a horizontal distance from the crank axle and a vertical distance from the crank axle. The affect of varying both the horizontal and vertical distance shall be examined separately.
FIGS. 3 and 5 show schematics of designs with the pivot horizontally forward of the crank axle. This pivot location has the drawback in that it does not maintain a constant distance between the crank axle and seat. When the pivot (center of rotation) is horizontally forward of the crank axle, the crank axle moves upward when the suspension is compressed upward. The more forward the pivot is, the greater the vertical movement in the cranks. Although the crank axle movement is a fraction of the movement of the rear wheel, it is still enough to affect the pedaling feel of the cranks because they are moving vertically relative to the rider.
The main advantage to having the pivot forward of the crank axle is that pedal induced bobbing is minimized. When the cranks are horizontal, the pedaling force is centered on the leading pedal that is approximately 175 mm (6.9 inches) in front of the crank axle. When the cranks are vertical, the pedal force is downward through the center of the crank axle. There is still significant downward pressure on the pedals even though no torque is being applied to the crank axle. The typical power stroke varies the horizontal location of the pedal force from 0 to 175 mm (6.9 inches) in front of the crank axle. Therefore it is advantageous for the pivot to have a horizontal location somewhere between 0 to 175 mm (6.9 inches). This keeps the pivot location as close to the pedal force as possible.
The vertical placement of the pivot requires consideration also. The traction force of the wheel with the ground causes the suspension to actuate in a downward direction. This traction force varies proportionally to the pedal force and proportionally to the gear selection. The traction force changes from forward to rearward when the rear brake is applied. With such a large variation of traction force, it is desirable to locate the pivot as low to the ground as possible so that it is closer in line with the traction force.
However, there is also a reason to have a higher pivot. It is desirable to have the wheel pull downward into the ground when the traction force is propelling the bike forward. This aids the wheel in gaining traction to the ground. It also helps to cancel out the rider's tendency to bounce up and then down with each pedal stroke. How far the pivot should be above ground level is still debatable. Some designs claim that the ideal vertical location is even with the crank axle. Other designs claim an even greater benefit having the pivot far above the level of the crank axle.
FIG. 4 shows a pivot location where the pivot is above the crank axle. Such designs have the advantage in that the pedal to seat distance is relatively constant, but the design tends to bob with each pedal stroke.
The pivot location shown in FIG. 3 produces almost no bobbing, but the pedal to seat distance still varies with suspension actuation. Of the fixed pivot URT designs, this one is probably the best and most commercially successful.
FIG. 5 shows a pivot location where the pivot is far forward and far above the crank axle. The pivot is too high to minimize bobbing and there is still the problem of the pedal to seat distance variation.
FIG. 6 shows a pivot location where the pivot is at the crank axle. In this case there is no variation in the pedal to seat distance, however these suspensions have considerable pedal induced bobbing.
All the pivot locations are a compromise of qualities. None of the pivot locations produce both requirements of:
a) maintaining the pedal to seat distance within acceptable levels
b) minimize the pedal induced bobbing
The swingarm can pivot around a simple pivot, as shown in the previous examples, or it can be a so-called “virtual pivot”. A virtual pivot is a pivot that is comprised of two links that connect the swingarm with the main frame. Each link has a pivot on each end. The two links define an instant center of rotation that is not necessarily located at any of the four pivoting connections. The instant center of rotation is located at the intersection of the two link centerlines. The link centerlines are defined as lines that contain both link pivots. Because the links rotate as the swingarm is compressed, the instant center moves with the links. The length and location of each link can be tailored to provide a specific movement of the instant center of rotation as the swingarm actuates through its range of travel.
An example of a URT that utilizes a virtual pivot is disclosed by Harris in U.S. Pat. No. 5,452,910. A schematic diagram of the links is shown in FIG. 7. The virtual pivot location is located somewhere directly above the crank axle. This location is chosen in order to keep the cranks from moving excessively in the vertical direction. The virtual pivot location also causes the rear wheel to move up and back in line with the bump force. The problem with this design is that the pedal induced bobbing has not been addressed. The design is little improvement on other simple pivot designs where the pivot was directly above the crank center.
Another example of a prior art URT that utilizes a virtual pivot is shown schematically in FIG. 8. This bike was make by the American company Azonic. Here the pivot is high and in front of the crank pivot. As the suspension is compressed, the pivot moves downward. Unfortunately, the virtual pivot is too high to minimize bobbing and the crank axle still has excessive vertical movement.
Thus, a need still exists for a rear wheel suspension for bicycles which will overcome the above mentioned problems with unified rear triangle suspensions constructed to date.